U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics National Crime Victimization Survey Crime Against People with Disabilities, 2008 December 2010 NCJ 231328 Erika Harrell, Ph.D., and Michael R. Rand BJS Statistician ---------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.csv) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2019 This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=65 ----------------------------------------------------------- In households in the United States, persons age 12 or older with disabilities experienced approximately 730,000 nonfatal violent crimes and 1.8 million property crimes in 2008 (table 1). This excludes persons living in institutions. Nonfatal violent crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault. Property crimes include household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and property theft. Disability is defined as a sensory, physical, mental, or emotional condition lasting 6 months or longer that makes it difficult for a person to perform activities of daily living. About 37% of the violent crimes against persons with disabilities in 2008 were serious violent crimes: rape or sexual assault (40,000), robbery (116,000), or aggravated assault (115,000). Persons with disabilities also were victims of about 459,000 simple assaults in 2008. These statistical tables present data on the victimization experiences of persons with disabilities from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), including comparisons to persons without disabilities, comparisons by types of disabilities, victim characteristics, and crime characteristics. To identify victims of crime who had disabilities, the NCVS adopted the survey questions about disabilities from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS). Because the NCVS does not identify persons in the general population with disabilities, data from the ACS were used to estimate rates of victimization for people with and without disabilities. (See Methodology for more information on the data sources and data limitations.) To compare crime victimization rates for persons with and without disabilities an age adjustment was necessary. In the United States the population with disabilities tends to be older than the population without disabilities. When victimization rates were age-adjusted, people with disabilities experienced higher rates of violence than people without disabilities 40 victimizations per 1,000 persons with disabilities compared to about 20 per 1,000 without disabilities. In fact, the age-adjusted rates of all crimes measured were at least twice as high for persons with disabilities. (See Methodology for more information on the age adjustment.) ------------------------------------------------------------- Crime Victims with Disabilities Awareness Act (Public Law 105-301), 1998 The Crime Victims with Disabilities Awareness Act mandated that the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) include statistics on crimes against people with disabilities and the characteristics of the victims of those crimes. The act was designed "to increase public awareness of the plight of victims of crime with developmental disabilities, to collect data to measure the magnitude of the problem, and to develop strategies to address the safety and justice needs of victims of crime with developmental disabilities." Section 5 of the act directed the Department of Justice to include statistics relating to "the nature of crimes against people with developmental disabilities; and the specific characteristics of the victims of those crimes" in the NCVS. This is the second report in the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) series on crime against people with disabilities. The first report, Crime Against People with Disabilities, 2007, NCJ 227814, October 2009, is available on the BJS Website. Because of changes in the questionnaire, comparisons between 2007 and 2008 should not be made. (See Methodology for more information on changes to the NCVS and ACS questionnaires.) ------------------------------------------------------------- Data from the 2008 NCVS and ACS data collections provide estimates on victim and crime characteristics of persons with and without disabilities, including crime rate, type of offenses, age, race and gender distribution, type of disabilities, and victim injuries. Violent crime rates *Adjusting for the varied age distributions of persons with and without disabilities, the violent crime rate against persons with disabilities was 40 violent crimes per 1,000 persons age 12 or older, which was double the violent crime rate for persons without disabilities (20 per 1,000)(table 2). *In 2008 the age-adjusted rate of serious violent crime against persons with disabilities was about 16 per 1,000 persons age 12 or older, compared to about 6 per 1,000 for persons without disabilities. *Persons with disabilities age 12 or older experienced violent crime at age-adjusted rates that were two to three times that of persons without disabilities for each violent crime measured (rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault). Violent crime victim characteristics *Persons ages 12 to 24 and ages 35 to 49 with disabilities were nearly twice as likely as persons in these age groups without disabilities to be victims of violent crime when comparing rates that were not adjusted for age (table 3). *Regardless of disability status, persons ages 25 to 34 experienced violence at about the same rate (not adjusting for age). *Among persons with disabilities, females had a higher risk of violent crime than males (after adjusting for age) in 2008 (table 4). *Whites and blacks with disabilities were equally likely to experience a violent crime after adjusting for age. *After adjusting for age, non-Hispanics with disabilities (42 per 1,000 persons age 12 or older) were more likely to experience a violent crime than Hispanics with disabilities (29 per 1,000 age 12 or older) in 2008. Violent crime characteristics *About 15% of violent crime victims with disabilities said that they suspected that they had been targeted due to their disabilities. Another 35% did not know if they had been targeted because of their disabilities (not shown in table). *Males with disabilities were less likely than males without disabilities to be victims of intimate partner violence. Among females the likelihood of intimate partner violence did not vary by disability status (table 5). *The percentage of crimes against persons with disabilities committed by well known or casual acquaintances was similar for male (40%) and female (36%) victims. *Persons with disabilities were slightly less likely than persons without disabilities to offer any type of resistance during a violent crime, including threatening or attacking the offender and using nonconfrontational tactics, such as yelling at or running from the offender (table 6). *About a fifth of violence against persons with disabilities involved an offender with a weapon (table 7). *Similar percentages of nonfatal violent crimes involving an offender armed with a firearm were committed against victims with (8%) and without (7%) disabilities. *About 27% of violent crime victims with disabilities were injured as a result of the crime; 11% sought treatment (table 8). *Violent crimes against about half of all victims were reported to the police in 2008, regardless of the victim's disability status (table 9). *Violent crime victims with disabilities were almost twice as likely to seek help from a victim advocacy agency (12%) as victims without disabilities (6%) (table 10). Types of disabilities *Among the types of disabilities measured in 2008, persons with cognitive disabilities had the highest risk of violent victimization (table 11). *No statistically significant differences emerged by type of disability in the rate of rape or sexual assault or in the rate of aggravated assault against persons with disabilities. *Persons with a cognitive disability had higher rates of robbery and simple assault than persons with other types of disabilities. *Females with a hearing disability were slightly more likely than males with a hearing disability to experience violent crime (table 12). Property crime ***.(Footnote Estimates of property crime against people with disabilities may be an undercount. See Methodology for detailed explanation.)*** *Household burglary made up a higher percentage of all property crime against households with persons with a disability (25%) than against households without persons with disabilities (19%) (table 13). *Property crime (overall property crime, household burglary, and motor vehicle theft) against households with persons with disabilities was less likely to be reported to police than when it was committed against households without persons with disabilities (table 14). ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Statistical Tables Table 1. Estimated number of violent and property crimes against persons, by type of crime and victim disability status, 2008 Table 2. Violent victimization rates, by type of crime and disability status, 2008 Table 3. Violent victimization rates, by age and disability status, 2008 Table 4. Violent victimization rates, by gender, race, Hispanic origin, and disability status, 2008 Table 5. Victim/offender relationship in violent crimes, by disability status, 2008 Table 6. Victim resistance in violent crimes, by disability status, 2008 Table 7. Violent crime, by offender weapon use and disability status, 2008 Table 8. Injury and medical treatment in violent crime, by disability status, 2008 Table 9. Violent crime reported to police, by type of crime and disability status, 2008 Table 10. Violent crime victims who used non-police victim advocacy agencies, by disability status and agency type, 2008 Table 11. Violent victimization rates of persons with disabilities, by type of crime and type of disability, 2008 Table 12. Violent victimization rates of persons with disabilities, by type of disability and gender, 2008 Table 13. Property crime occurring in households, by type of crime and disability status, 2008 Table 14. Property crime reported to police, by type of crime and household disability status, 2008 ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- Methodology The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is an annual data collection conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The NCVS collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. Survey results are based on data gathered from residents living throughout the United States, including persons living in group quarters, such as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group dwellings. The scope of the survey excludes Armed Forces personnel living in military barracks and persons living in an institutional setting, such as a correctional or hospital facility. For more detail, see the Methodology in the BJS series, Criminal Victimization in the United States, Statistical Tables available on the BJS Website. (Criminal Victimization in the United States, Statistical Tables, 2007, NCJ 227669, February 2010.) Data sources The NCVS adopted questions from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) to measure the rate of victimization against people with disabilities. The ACS Subcommittee on Disability Questions developed the disability questions based on questions used in the 2000 Decennial Census and earlier versions of the ACS. The questions identify persons who may require assistance to maintain their independence, be at risk for discrimination, or lack opportunities available to the general population because of limitations related to a prolonged (6 months or longer) sensory, physical, mental, or emotional condition. More information about the ACS and the disability questions is available on the U.S. Census Bureau Website (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/). In this report, disability is defined as a sensory, physical, mental, or emotional condition lasting 6 months or longer that makes it difficult for a person to perform activities of daily living. The questions adopted from the ACS identified the following six types of disabilities: *Hearing limitation entails deafness or serious difficulty hearing. *Vision limitation is blindness or serious difficulty seeing, even when wearing glasses. *Cognitive limitation includes serious difficulty in concentrating, remembering, or making decisions because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition. *Ambulatory limitation is difficulty walking or climbing stairs. *Self-care limitation is a condition that causes difficulty dressing or bathing. *Independent living limitation is a physical, mental, or emotional condition that impedes doing errands alone, such as doctor visits or shopping. For more detailed definitions of the types of disabilities measured, see U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2008 Subject Definitions. Retrieved October 26, 2010 from http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/data_documentation/Su bjectDefinitions/2008_ACSSubjectDefinitions.pdf. Changes to the disability questions on the NCVS and ACS in 2008 In 2008 the U.S. Census Bureau changed some of the disability questions on the ACS. The question about sensory disability was separated into two questions about blindness and deafness, and the questions about physical disability were asked only about serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Also, questions on employment disability and about going outside of the home were eliminated in 2008. Census Bureau analysis of 2007 and 2008 ACS disability data revealed significant conceptual and measurement differences between the 2007 and 2008 disability questions. The Census Bureau concluded that data users should not compare the 2007 and 2008 estimates of the population with disabilities. Because the 2007 and 2008 NCVS disability questions mirrored the ACS, estimates of victimization of people with disabilities from the 2007 and 2008 NCVS should not be compared. Further explanation about incomparability of the 2007 and 2008 ACS disability data is accessible at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disability/2008ACS_disability. pdf. Disability questions included in the NCVS in 2008 ***(Footnote *The full NCVS questionnaire and an expanded Methodology are available on the BJS Website (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245).)*** Questions 168 through 173 in the NCVS 2008 survey asked respondents for information related to health conditions, impairments, or disabilities. 168. Research has shown that people with disabilities may be more vulnerable to crime victimization. The next questions ask about any health conditions, impairments, or disabilities you may have. 169a. Are you deaf or do you have serious difficulty hearing? 169b. Are you blind or do you have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses? 170a. Because of a physical mental or emotional condition, do you have serious difficulty: (1) Concentrating, remembering, or making decisions? (2) Walking or climbing stairs? (3) Dressing or bathing? 170b. Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, do you have difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor's office or shopping? 171. Is "Yes" marked in any of 169a-170b? (That is, has the respondent indicated that he/she has a health condition or disability?) 172. During the incident you just told me about, do you have reason to suspect you were victimized because of your health condition(s), impairment(s), or disability(ies)? 173. What health conditions, impairments, or disabilities do you believe cause you to be targeted for this incident? *The full NCVS questionnaire and an expanded Methodology are available on the BJS Website (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245). Calculation of rates using the NCVS and the ACS The disability-related questions were not administered to each person in the NCVS sample in 2008. Questions were administered to people who reported being a victim of one of the measured offenses (as part of the crime incident report). To calculate rates of victimization for people with and without disabilities, BJS obtained 2008 population data about persons age 12 and older from the Census Bureau's ACS program. Because NCVS questions mirror the ACS questions, it is possible to combine victimization estimates from the NCVS for people with disabilities with population data from the ACS to produce population based rates of victimization. Age-adjusted violent victimization rates In general, the population with disabilities is older than the population without disabilities. To account for this difference in the age distribution, many comparisons between the victimization experiences of the people with and without disabilities use age-adjusted victimization rates. Without this adjustment, comparisons would be confounded by differences that may be attributed to the age distribution rather than disability status. Direct standardization of populations was used to calculate the age-adjusted violent victimization rates. Other federal agencies use similar methods to calculate age-adjusted rates of diseases and mortality. The population with disabilities was taken from the ACS and divided into seven age categories: ages 12 to 15, 16 to 19, 20 to 24, 25 to 34, 35 to 49, 50 to 64, and 65 or older. For each age category, the original unadjusted rate of violent crime was calculated by dividing the number of violent victimizations for people in that age group in the NCVS by the number of people in the same age group from the ACS. A weight for each age group was computed by dividing the number of all persons in an age group without disabilities by the total number of persons without a disability. The weight computed for a particular age group was multiplied by the original unadjusted violent victimization rate for the same age group. This procedure was completed for each age group. Results were summed across all age groups to obtain age-adjusted rates of violent victimization against persons with disabilities. This procedure was used to produce the age-adjusted rates of violent victimization of persons with disabilities by gender, race, Hispanic origin, and type of violent crime. For more information on direct standardization of populations, see Curtin, L.R., & Klein, R.J. (1995). Direct Standardization (Age-adjusted Death Rates), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved November 29, 2010, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/statnt/statnt06rv.pdf. Potential undercount of property crime The NCVS measure of property crime is a household-based measure. The questions NCVS used to identify whether a person had a disability were asked only of those respondents who reported that they had been victimized. If the person who reported the property crime was a household member with a disability, then the NCVS identified the property crime as one against a household that has a person with a disability. If a household member without a disability reported the property crime during the survey, the NCVS did not ask whether any other household member had a disability. For this reason, the estimate of property crime against people with disabilities may be an undercount of such crimes. Limitations of the estimates The NCVS was designed to measure the incidence of crime against the U.S. civilian population, excluding persons who live in institutions. A significant number of people with disabilities, especially those with the most profound and severe conditions, live in institutional settings. The measures of crime against persons with disabilities (as measured by the NCVS) covers only those people with disabilities who are living among the general population in household settings. The survey instruments, modes of interview, and interviewing protocols used in the NCVS may not be suited for interviewing people with difficulty communicating, especially by telephone. Currently, about 70% of the interviews conducted for the NCVS are by telephone. Some people have disabilities that limit their verbal communication and use technology to enhance their ability to communicate, but many people do not have access to such technology. Additionally, the survey questionnaire, while avoiding legal terminology, incorporates some complex concepts and language that may not be easily understood by people with cognitive disabilities. The survey also requires direct interviews with eligible respondents and allows the use of proxy interviews in a limited set of circumstances. A proxy interview is allowed when a respondent is physically or mentally incapable of responding. The survey restrictions on proxy interviews were instituted because someone else may not know about the victimization experiences of the respondent, and because the person providing the information via proxy may be the perpetrator of the abuse or violence experienced by the respondent . Overall, the effects on the estimates due to proxy responses are probably small. However, when measuring victimization of people with disabilities, the use of proxies could be a significant issue. About 1% of the crimes reported to the NCVS in 2008 were obtained from proxy interviews. In the NCVS data on crimes against persons with disabilities, about 2% were obtained from proxy interviews. Since proxy respondents may be more likely to omit crime incidents or may not know some details about reported crime incidents, the number of crimes against persons with disabilities may have been undercounted. While the NCVS and ACS have identical disability questions, other factors associated with the surveys may impact the calculation and comparisons of victimization rates. For example, the NCVS is conducted by personal visits and telephone interviews while the ACS is a self-administered survey. The response rate for the NCVS in 2008 was 90.4% of households and 86.2% of eligible individuals. The response rate for the ACS was 97.9%. Response rates for persons with disabilities could not be calculated because information in disability is not available for nonrespondents. Possible non-interview biases that may affect the estimates have not been studied. Most variables used in this report had a very low item non-response. Standard error computations Comparisons of percentages and rates made in this report were tested to determine if observed differences were statistically significant. Differences described as higher, lower, or different passed a hypothesis test at the 0.05 level of statistical significance (95%-confidence level). The tested difference was greater than twice the standard error of that difference. For comparisons that were statistically significant at the 0.10 level (90%-confidence level), the terms "somewhat," "slightly," or "marginally" are used to note the nature of the difference. Significance-testing calculations were conducted at BJS using statistical programs developed specifically for the NCVS by the U.S. Census Bureau. These programs take into consideration many aspects of the complex NCVS sample design when calculating estimates. Estimates based on 10 or fewer sample cases have high relative standard errors. Care should be taken when comparing such estimates to other estimates when both are based on 10 or fewer sample cases. ------------------------------------------------------------- The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. James P. Lynch is director. These Statistical Tables present the first release of findings from permanent data collection programs. Erika Harrell, Ph.D., and Michael R. Rand wrote this report. Michael Planty, Ph.D., verified the report. Catherine Bird, Georgette Walsh, and Jill Duncan edited the report, Tina Dorsey produced the report, and Jayne E. Robinson prepared the report for final printing under the supervision of Doris J. James. December 2010, NCJ 231328 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- This report in portable document format and in ASCII and its related statistical data and tables are available at the BJS World Wide Web Internet site: . ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- Office of Justice Programs Innovation  Partnerships  Safer Neighborhoods http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov ------------------------------------------------------------- 12/7/2010/JER 3:44pm